Search form

Featured Topics

To promote stable, constructive labor-management relations through the resolution and prevention of labor disputes in a manner that gives full effect to the collective-bargaining rights of employees, unions, and agencies.

This case is before us on a request for reconsideration of 45
FLRA No. 38 filed by the Union under section 2429.17 of the
Authority's Rules and Regulations. The Agency did not file an
opposition to the request. Because the Union fails to establish
that extraordinary circumstances exist which warrant
reconsideration of our decision, we will deny the Union's request.

II. Authority's Decision in 45 FLRA No. 38

In 45 FLRA No. 38, we construed the Union's arguments that
the Arbitrator misinterpreted Article 10, Section 1, of the
parties' collective bargaining agreement(1) as a contention that
the award failed to draw its essence from the agreement. We
rejected that contention, deciding as follows:

The Union has not shown that the Arbitrator's
interpretation of the agreement is irrational,
implausible, or otherwise deficient. As such, the Union
has not shown that the award fails to draw its essence
from the agreement.

45 FLRA No. 38, slip op. at 3. Citing Illinois Air National
Guard, 182nd Tactical Air Support Group and The Association of
Civilian Technicians, Illinois Chapter 34, 34 FLRA 591, 593-94
(1990) (Illinois Air National Guard), we also concluded that the
Union had not demonstrated that the award was deficient based on
the Arbitrator's failure to address specifically the portion of
Article 10, Section 1, providing an overtime assignment preference
to employees currently assigned to the duties at issue.(2)

III. Union's Request for Reconsideration

The Union asserts that the Authority improperly relied on
Illinois Air National Guard "to support the Arbitrator's failure
to address a key issue in the case." Request for Reconsideration
at 3. Specifically, the Union contends that the Authority
erroneously used that decision to support the Arbitrator's failure
"to address the issue of the [A]gency's duty" under Article 10,
Section 1, to make overtime assignments to "those employees
currently assigned the job." Id. at 2.

IV. Analysis and Conclusions

Section 2429.17 of the Authority's Rules and Regulations
permits a party that can establish "extraordinary circumstances"
to move for reconsideration of a decision of the Authority. The
Union fails to establish "extraordinary circumstances" within the
meaning of section 2429.17.

The arguments presented by the Union in support of its
request for reconsideration constitute nothing more than
disagreement with the Authority's decision in 45 FLRA No. 38, and
an attempt to relitigate the merits of the case. As such, these
arguments do not constitute extraordinary circumstances warranting
reconsideration of our decision, and we will deny the request.

Overtime work assignments will be distributed
fairly and equitably . . . among all qualified

employees, consistent with workload requirements. Preference
will be given to those employees who are currently assigned to
the job. . . .

Joint Exh. 1 at 23.

2. In Illinois Air National
Guard, we held that the fact
that the opinion accompanying an award does not mention
specific provisions of the agreement which a union relied on
does not establish that the arbitrator did not consider those
provisions or provide a basis for finding the award deficient.
34 FLRA at 593-94.